georges fontenis manifesto of libertarian communism.lt

8/11/2019 Georges Fontenis Manifesto of Libertarian Communism.lt

1/24

eAnarchist LibraryAnti-Copyright

August 11, 2014

Georges FontenisManifesto of Libertarian Communism

1953

Unable to find the translator; will update when discovered.Retrieved on 9 August 2014 from hp://libcom.org/library/

manifesto-of-libertarian-communism-georges-fontenis

Georges Fontenis

Manifesto of Libertarian

Communism

1953


2/24

2


3/24

3

Contents

Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51. Libertarian Communism, A Social Doctrine . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62. e Problem of the Programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113. Relations Between the Masses and the

Revolutionary Vanguard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14e Need for a Vanguard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14e Nature of the Role of the Revolutionary Vanguard . . 15In What Forms Can e Revolutionary VanguardPlay Its Role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Internal Principles Of e Revolutionary OrganisationOr Party . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Ideological Unity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19Tactical Unity, A Collective Way Of Acting . . . . . . . . . . . 20Collective Action And Discipline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Federation Or Internal Democracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224. e Libertarian Communist Programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24Aspects Of Bourgeois Rule Capitalism And e State . 24Capitalism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25What is Capitalism? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25e State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

5. e Qalities of Libertarian Communism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29e Qalities of Libertarian Communism . . . . . . . . . . . . 29Libertarian Communism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31Libertarian Communism and Humanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

6. e Revolution: e Problem of Power, the Problem

of State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33e Revolution: e Problem of Power, theProblem of State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33What is the Revolution? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33e Period of Transition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34e Dictatorship of the Proletariat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35Direct Workers Power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36Defence of the Revolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37Revolutionary Power and Freedom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39


4/24

4

7. Respective Roles of the Specific AnarchistOrganisation and of the Masses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Libertarian Communist Morality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41We Oppose Moralities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41Do We Have a Morality? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42Our Morality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

45

guided by the anarchistOrganisation.Forexamplethe meansimplythe solidarity, courage and sense of responsibilitiesthatwe havecited earlier as virtues of our morality.

ere is one point that should make us pause, an aspect of ourmorality which people might aach to the meaning of solidarity butwhich is reallythe very epitome of our morality: truth. As much as itis normal for us to cheat our enemy, the bourgeoisie, who themselves

use all kinds of deceit, so we must tell the truth not just betweencomrades but to the masses.

How could we do otherwise when more than anything else, theirawareness, and so their understanding and their judgment, mustbe increased? ose who have tried to behave otherwise have onlysucceededin humiliating and disheartening thepeople, making themall lose all sense of truth, of analysis and of criticism.

ere is nothing proletarian or revolutionary about immoralistcynicism. at is the style of decadent elements of the bourgeoisiewho declare the emptiness of the official morality but are incapableof finding a healthy morality in any existing milieu.

e immoralist is outwardly free in all their movements. But theynolongerknow wheretheyre going and whentheyhave deceivedother people they deceive themselves.

It is not enough to have a goal you also need a way of geingthere.

e working out of a morality within the aware masses andstill more within the libertarian communist movement comesto strengthenthe structure of revolutionary ideologyandto bringanimportantcontributiontothe preparation ofa new culture,at thesame time as it totally repudiates the culture of the bourgeoisie.


5/24

44

But between those actions normally assured by the play ofaffectiv-ity and feelings (maternal, love, empathy, saving someone who is indanger and so on) and those which depend on contracts, on wrienor unwrien agreements (and so on the law), there is a whole gamutof social relations which rely on moral conceptions and a moralconscience.

Where is the guarantee of sincere respect in contract clauses?

What should a persons aitude be towards their enemies? Whichweapons do they forbid themselves use of? ere is only one moral-ity which can act as a guide, which can fix limits, which can preventconstant recourse to litigation and juries.

It is in revolutionary practice and the lives of the aware proletariatthat we find values such as solidarity, courage, a sense of responsi-bility, clearness of thought, tenacity, a federalism or true democracyof working-class organisations and anarchists which realises bothdiscipline and a spirit of initiative, respect for revolutionary democ-racy that is to say the possibility for all currents which sincerelyseek the creation of communist society to put forward their ideas,to criticise and so to perfect revolutionary theory and practice.

e revolutionary fundamental that we have established as animperative clearly exempts us from any morality in dealings withthe enemy, the bourgeoisie,whichfor its own defence wouldtry tomake revolutionaries accept the prohibitions of its morality. It isquite clear that in this field only the ends can dictate our conduct.is means that once the ends are recognised and scientifically laiddown, the means are simply a maer of tactics and in consequencecan onlybevalued as meansif theyare suitedtothe ends, tothesought forgoal.Sothis does notmean anyold means andthereis no

question of justifying means. We must reject the equivocal formulathe ends justify the means and say more simply the means onlyexist, are only chosen, with a view to the ends to which they are tiedand suited, and do not have to be justified before the enemy and interms of the enemys morality

In contrast though, these means do inevitably come within theframework of our morality, since they are appropriate to our ideal an ideal, libertarian communism, which implies the Revolution,which in turn implies that the masses will grasp consciousness

5

Foreword

e Manifesto of Libertarian Communism was wrien in 1953by Georges Fontenis for the Federation Communiste Libertaire ofFrance. It is one of the key texts of the anarchist-communist current.

Itwas preceeded by the bestwork ofBakunin,Guillaume,Malat-esta, Berneri, the organisational Platform of the Libertarian Commu-

nists wrien by Makhno, Arshinov and Ma, which sprang fromthe defeats of the Russian Revolution, and the the statements of theFriends ofDurruti, also a result of another defeat, that of the SpanishRevolution.

Like the Platform it pied itself against the Synthesis of Faureand Voline which aempted a compromise between Stirnerite indi-vidualism, anarcho-syndicalism, and libertarian communism. Likethe Platform it reaffirmed the class-struggle nature of anarchismand showed how it had sprung from the struggles of the oppressed.It had the experience of another thirty years of struggle and was a

more developed document than the Platform. However it failed totake account of the role of women in capitalist society and offered nospecific analysis of womens oppression. Whilst the F.C.L. was veryactive in the struggle against French colonialism in North Africa, itfailed to incorporate an analysis of racism into its Manifesto.

It rejected, rightly, the concept of the Dictatorship of the Prole-tariat and the Transitional Period. Where it made mistakes was inthe use of the concepts of the party and the vanguard. To be fairthe word party had been used in the past by Malatesta to describethe anarchist movement, but the association with social-democratsand Leninists hadgivenit connotations which can only be avoided by

dropping the term. Similarly, vanguard had been used extensively,byanarchistsinthe past to describe,not theLeninist vanguard,buta group of workers with advanced ideas. e term was used, forexample, in this respect in the Spanish movement (see Bookchinswritings on the subject), and also by anarchist-communists in theUnited States who named their paper Vanguard (see the memoirs ofSamDolgoff). However, ithastoo manyunhappyassociations withLeninism. Whilstwe recognisethat there existadvanced groupsof workers, and that the anarchist movement has ideas in advance


6/24

6

of most of the class, we must recognise fully the great creativity ofthe whole of the working class. ere exist contradictions betweenadvanced groups andthe class as a whole,complexcontradictionswhich cannot be explained in simple black and white terms, whichcould lead to theLeninist danger of substitutinga group forthe wholeclass. e anarchist-communistOrganisation should be aware ofthese problems and aempt to minimalise these contradictions. True,

the Manifesto sees this vanguard as internal to the class, rather thanan external vanguard of professional revolutionaries as Lenin saw it.Nevertheless the term should be regarded with great suspicion.

e Manifesto continued the arguments for effective libertarianOrganisation and ideological and tactical unity, based on the classstruggle. e supporters of the manifesto made a number of politicalmistakes in the actions that they took. Unity was interpreted in anarrow sense, and soon they strayed off into the fiasco of runningrevolutionary candidates in the elections, which led to the break-upof their Organisation.

Like the Platformthe Manifesto is marredby a number of errors,with the Platform it was the idea of the executive commiee, withthe Manifesto it was the idea of the vanguard. Despite its short-comings it is still an important document, and its best features mustbe taken notice of in developing an anarchist-communist theory andstrategy for today.

1. Libertarian Communism, A Social

Doctrine

It was in the 19th Century, when capitalism was developing andthe first great struggles of the working class were taking place and to be more precise it was within the First International (1861 1871) that a social doctrine appeared called revolutionary so-cialism (as opposed to reformist or statist legalist socialism). iswas also known as anti-authoritarian socialism or collectivismand then later as anarchism, anarchist communism or libertariancommunism.

43

werefoughtagainst, that theirpromoters(Socrates and Christ forexample)were oen persecuted, thanthatmorality tendstowardsinertia.

in any case it does not seem that the enslaved have been able tointroduce their own values into these moralities.

But the important thing here is to know if the enslaved andthe revolutionaries who express their desires can have their own

values, their own morality.If we do not wish to accept the morality of the society in which

we live, if we refuse this morality both because it recognises so asto maintain a social system based on exploitation and domination,and because it is imbued with abstractions and metaphysical ideals,then on what can we base our morality? ere is a solution to thisapparent contradiction: it is that thought and social science allowus to envisage a process which would constitute the possibility forthe human race to blossom out in every way, and that this processisreallynothing other thanthe generaldesires of the oppressed,asexpressed by true socialism,by libertarian communism. So it is ourrevolutionarygoalwhichis our ideal,our imperative. It is certainlyan ideal and an imperative on which a morality can be based, but it isan ideal which rests on the real and not on the religious revelation ora metaphysics is deal is a kind of humanism,but a humanism basedon a revolutionary transformation of society and not a sentimentalhumanism resting on nothing at all and camouflaging the realitiesof the social struggle.

Our Morality

What are the moral values which demonstrate this ideal in theproletariat?

Is this morality expressed by rules and precepts?It is clear that it can no longer be a question of acting, and of

judging moralities that we oppose, in terms of ideas of good andevil, any more than we can let ourselves be dragged into futile wordgames as to whether the motive force for action should be calledegoism or altruism.


7/24

42

So, they do not simply express a practical need for mediation asthey may come into contradiction with new conditions of existencethatappear.Moreover, theyare marked byareligious, theologicalormetaphysical character and put forward their rules as the expressionof a supernatural imperative actions which conform to or breakthese rules boast a mystical nature as virtue or sin. Resignation,which really should only be a persons recognition of their limits

before certain facts, becomes the primary virtue and can even impela search for suffering, itself becoming the supreme virtue. From thispoint of view Christianity is one of the most hateful of moralities.So morality is not simply a codification of external sanctions but isdeeply rootedinindividualsintheform of moralconscience. ismoral conscience is acquired and maintained largely as a result of thereligious nature with which morality is imbued, and is itself markedby a religious, supernatural nature. So it becomes quite foreign tothe simple translation into a persons conscience of the needs ofliving socially.

Finally, and most importantly, even when moralities do not openlyexpress the division of societies into classes or castes they are usedby privileged groups to justify and guarantee their domination. Lifelaw and religion (religion, law and morality aresimply expressions inneighbouring spheres of the same social reality)moralitysanctionsthe existing conditions and relations of domination and exploitation.

Since moralities are expressions of peoples alienation in exploita-tive societies,as areideologies, laws, religions,etc . . . being charac-terised by inertia,mystification, resignation andthejustification andmaintenance ofclass privilege you will understandwhy anarchistshave spent a lot of effort in denouncing their true nature.

Do We Have a Morality?

It is oen pointed out that moralities could evolve or be modified,that one morality could replace another even within societies basedon exploitation. ere have beenfaintdifferences,adaptations orvariations linked up with conditions of life but they (moralities) allprotected the same essential values submissiveness and respect forproperty forexample. It remains nolesstruethat these adaptations

7

is doctrine,or theory,appears as areaction of the organisedsocialistworkers. It is atalleventslinkedtothere being a progres-sivelysharpening class struggle. It is an historicalproductwhichoriginates from certain conditions of history, from the developmentof class societies and not through the idealist critique of a fewspecific thinkers.

e role of the founders of the doctrine, chiefly Bakunin, was

to express the true aspirations of the masses, their reactions andtheir experiences, and not to artificially create a theory by relyingon a purely ideal abstract analysis or on earlier theories. Bakuninand with himJames Guillaume, then Kropotkin,Reclus, J. Grave,Malatesta and so on started out by looking at the situation of theworkers associations and the peasant bodies, at how they organisedand fought.

at anarchism originated in class struggles cannot be disputed.How is it then that anarchism has very oen been thought of as

a philosophy, a morality or ethic independent of the class struggle,and so as a form of humanism detached from historical and socialconditions?

We see several reasons for this. On the one hand, the first an-archist theoreticians sometimes sought to trust to the opinions ofwriters, economists and historians who had come before them (espe-cially Proudhon, many of whose writings do undoubtedly expressanarchist ideas).

e theoreticians who followed them have even sometimes foundin writers like La Boetie, Spencer, Godwin, Stirner, etc. ideas whichare analogousto anarchism inthe sensethat theydemonstrate anoppositiontotheforms ofexploitative societies andtothe principles

of domination they discovered in them. But the theories ofGodwin,Stirner, Tucker and the rest are simply observations on society they dont take account of History and the forces which determine it,or of the objective conditions which pose the problem of Revolution.

On the other hand, in all societies based on exploitation and dom-ination there have always been individual or collective acts of revolt,sometimes with a communist and federalist or truly democratic con-tent. As a result, anarchism has sometimes been thought of as theexpression of peoples eternal struggle towards freedom and justice


8/24

8

a vague idea, insufficiently grounded in sociology or history, andone that tends to turn anarchism into a vague humanism based onabstract notions of humanity and freedom. Bourgeois historiansof the working class movement are always ready to mix up anarchistcommunism with individualist and idealist theories, and are to agreat extent responsible for the confusion. ese are the ones whohave aempted to bring together Stirner and Bakunin.

By forgeing theconditions of anarchisms birth, it hassometimesbeen reduced to a kind of ultraliberalism and lost its materialist,historical and revolutionary character.

But at any rate, even if revolts previous to the 19 th Century andideas ofcertainthinkers on therelations betweenindividualpeopleand human groups did prepare the way for anarchism, there was noanarchism and doctrine until Bakunin.

e works of Godwin for example express the existence of classsociety very well, even if they do so in an idealist and confused way.And the alienation of the individual by the group, the family, religion,the state, morality, etc. is certainly of a social nature, is certainly theexpression of a society divided into castes or classes.

It can be said that aitudes, ideas and ways of acting of people wecould call rebels, non-conformers, or anarchists in the vague senseof the term have always existed.

But the coherent formulation of an anarchist communist theorydates from the end of the 19th Century and is continued each day,perfecting itself and becoming more precise.

So anarchism could notbe assimilatedto a philosophyor to anabstract or individualist ethic.

Itwas bornin and outof the social,andithadto wait fora given

historic period and a given state of class antagonism for anarchistcommunist aspirations to show themselves clearly for the phenom-enon or revolt to result in a coherent and complete revolutionaryconception.

Since anarchism is not an abstract philosophy or ethic it cannotaddress itself to the abstract person, to the person in general. Foranarchism there does not exist in our societies the human beingfull stop: there is the exploited person of the despoiled classes andthere is the person of the privileged groups, of the dominant class.

41

into society,graduallyas onthe one handitsroleis completed bythe consolidation of the classless society and its evolution from thelower tothe higherstage ofcommunism,and as onthe other thepeople as a whole have acquired the necessary level of awareness.

Development of the peoples capacity for self government andrevolutionary vigilance these must be the tasks of the specificOrganisation once the Revolution has been accomplished. e fate

of the Revolution rests to a great extent on the aitude of the specificOrganisation, on the way it sees its role. For the success of theRevolution is not inevitable: the people may give up the fight; theOrganisation of the revolutionary minority may neglect its vigilanceand all the bases to be established for a restoration of the bourgeoisieor a bureaucratic dictatorship it may even transform itself into abureaucratic power. No use is served by hiding these dangers or byrefusing to undertake organised action to prevent them.

We must conduct the fight with a very clear head and it will be inproportion to our clearheadedness and vigilance that the anarchistOrganisation will be able to fulfill its historic task.

Libertarian Communist Morality

When it sets out objectives to be reached, and when it specifiesthe nature of the role the vanguard Organisation should take in rela-tiontothe masses, revolutionaryanarchist theory reflects a certainnumber of rules of conduct. So we must clarify what we mean bymorality.

We Oppose Moralities

e moralities of all societies reflect to a certain extent the wayof life and the level of development of those societies, and as a resultthey are expressed in very strict rules which allow no deviationin any sense (transgression, the will to change these rules being acrime). In this way morals (which do express a certain need in theframework of social life) and towards inertia.


9/24


10/24

10

political revolution in seingitself freeit frees allhumanity; inbreaking the power of the privileged class it abolishes classes.

Certainly nowadays there arent precise boundaries between theclasses. It is duringvarious episodes of theclass struggle thatdivisionoccurs. ere are notprecise boundaries but there aretwo polesproletariat and bourgeoisie (capitalists, bureaucrats etc.); the middleclasses are split in periods of crisis and move towards one pole or the

other; they are unable to provide a solution by themselves as theyhave neither the revolutionary characteristics of the proletariat, norreal control of contemporary society like the bourgeoisie as properlydefined. In strikes for example you may see that one section ofthe technicians (especially those who are specialists, those in theresearch departments for example) rejoins the working class whileanother (technicians who fill higher staff positions and most peoplein supervisory roles) moves away from the working-class, at least fora time. Trade Union practice has always relied on trial-and-error, onpragmatism, unionising certain sectors and not others according totheir role and occupation. In any case, it is occupation and aitudethat distinguish a class more than salary.

So there is the proletariat. ere is its most determined, mostactive part, the working class as properly defined. ere is alsosomething wider than the proletariat and which includes other socialstrata that must be won over to action: this is the mass of the people,which comprises small peasants, poor artisans and so on as well asthe proletariat.

Its nota question of fallingforsome kind ofproletarian mystiquebutofappreciatingthis specificfact: the proletariat,eventhoughit is slowto seize awareness and despiteitsretreats and defeats, is

ultimately the only real creator of Revolution.Bakunin: Understand that since the proletarian, the manual

worker, the common labourer, is the historic representative of theworlds last slave-system, their emancipation is everyones emancipa-tion, their triumph the final triumph of humanity. . .

Certainly it happens that people belonging to privileged socialgroups break with their class, and with its ideology and its advan-tages, and come to anarchism. eir contribution is considerable butin some sense these people become proletarians.

39

it played down its achievements so as to devote itself above all elseto the military tasks of its defence.

Revolutionary Power and Freedom

e revolutionary struggle itself and then the consolidation of thetransformation created by the revolution both raise the question of

the freedom of political tendencies which lean towards the mainte-nance or therestoration ofexploitation. It is one of the aspects ofthe direct power of the masses and of the defence of the Revolution.

Itcannotbe a question here of freedom as properlydefined which(till now existing only as something to be striven for) is preciselywhat the Revolution brings about: the doing away with of exploita-tion and alienation, government by everyone, and so active participa-tion in social life and true democracy for all. It cannot be a questioneither of the right for all the partisan currents of classes (and so State-less) society to put forward their particular solutions and expresstheir differences of opinion. All that goes without saying.

But it is not at all the same when its a maer of groups and organ-isations which are more or less openly opposing workers control anthe exercise of power by the masses organisations. And this prob-lem is just as, if not more, likely to come from bureaucratic pseudo-socialist groups as from groups of the defeated bourgeoisie.

A distinction must be made. At first, during the violent phaseof the struggle, those structures and tendencies which are defend-ing or seeking to restore the exploitative society must be forciblycrushed. And the enemy must not be allowed to artfully organiseitself, either to demoralise or to spy. at would be negation of the

fight, surrender in fact. Makhno and also the Spanish libertariansfound themselves faced with these problems and resolved them bysuppressing the enemys propaganda. But in cases where the ex-pression of reactionary ideologies can have no consequencefor theoutcome of the Revolution, as for example when its achievementshave been consolidated, theseideologies can be expressedif theyare still foundinteresting or if they retaintheirpower. eyarethen nothing morethan atopic ofcuriosityandthe commitmentofthe people to the Revolution takes away any poison le in them. If


11/24

38

e problem ofdelinquencymaybelinked up duringtherevo-lutionaryperiod withthatofdefence of the Revolution. e disap-pearance ofbourgeoislaw and of thejudicialand prison systemsof class society should not make us forget that there remain asocialpeople (however few compared to the appalling number of prisonersin bourgeois society, produced in the main by the conditions theylive under social injustice, poverty and exploitation) and that there

is the problem of some bourgeois who cannot in any way be assimi-lated. e agencies of popular direct power which we have definedearlier are obliged to prevent them doing harm.

With a murderer, a dangerous maniac or a saboteur you cannoton the pretext of freedom let them run off and commit the samecrime again. But their puing out of harms way by the peoples secu-rityservices has nothingin common with class societys degradingprison system. e individual who is deprived of freedom shouldbe treated more medically than judicially until they can be safelyreturned into society.

However, the Revolution may not inevitably be realised every-where at once and there could actually be successive revolutionswhich will only come together to make the universal revolution ifthey are spread abroad, if the revolutionary infection catches hold,if at very least the proletariat fights internationally for the defenceand extension of revolutionary which are at the outset limited.

en, as well as internal defence of the Revolution, external de-fence becomes necessary, but this can only take place if based onan armed populace organised into militias and, we must emphasize,withthe supportof theinternationalproletariatand possibilitiesfor therevolutionto expand. e Revolution diesif it letsitselfbe

limited and if on the pretext of defending itself it falls into restoringthe State and so class society.

But the best defence for the new society lies in it asserting itsrevolutionary character because this quickly creates conditions inwhich no aempt at a restoration of the bourgeoisie will find asolid base. e total affirmation by the revolutionary territory of itssocialist character is in fact its best weapon because it creates energyand enthusiasm at home and infection and solidarity abroad. It wasperhaps one of the most fatalerrors of the Spanish Revolutionthat

11

ForBakunin again, the socialist revolutionaries, that isthe an-archists,speaktothe working massesin bothtown and country,including allpeople ofgood will fromthe upperclasses who,mak-ing a clean break with their past, would join them unreservedly andaccept their programme in full.

But for all that you cant say that anarchism speaks to the abstractperson, to the person in general, without taking into account their

social status.To deprive anarchism of its class character would be to condemnit

to formlessness, to an emptiness of content, so that it would becomean inconsistent philosophical pastime, a curiosity for intelligent bour-geois, an object of sympathy for people longing to have an ideal, asubject for academic discussion.

So we conclude: Anarchismis nota philosophyof theindividualor of the human being in a general sense.

Anarchism is if you like a philosophy or an ethic but in a veryspecific, very concrete sense. It is so by the desires it represents, bythe goals that it gets: as Bakunin says (e proletarians) triumphis humanitys final triumph . . .

Proletarian, class based in origin, it is only in its goals that it isuniversally human or, if you prefer, humanist.

It is a socialist doctrine, or to be more accurate the only truesocialism or communism, the only theory and method capable ofachieving a society without castes and classes, of bringing aboutfreedom and equality.

Socialanarchism oranarchistcommunism,oragainlibertariancommunism, is a doctrine ofsocial revolution which speaks tothe proletariatwhose desiresit represents,whosetrueideology it

demonstrates an ideology which the proletariat becomes awareof through its own experiences.

2. e Problem of the Programme

As anarchism is a social doctrine it makes itself known throughan ensemble of analyses and proposals which set out purposes andtasks,in other words through a programme. And its this programme


12/24

12

which constitutesthe shared platformforallmilitantsinthe anar-chistOrganisation.Without the platformthe onlycooperationtherecould be would be based on sentimental, vague and confused desires,and there would not be any real unity of views. en there wouldonly be the coming together under the same name of different andeven opposing ideas.

A questions arises: could the programme not be a synthesis, tak-

ing account of what is common to people who refer to the same ideal,or more accurately to the same or nearly the same label? at wouldbe to seek an artificial unity where to avoid conflicts you wouldonly uphold most of the time what isnt really important: youd finda common but almost empty platform. e experiment has beentried too many times and out of syntheses unions, coalitions,alliances and understandings has only ever come ineffectivenessand a quick return to conflict: as reality posed problems for whicheach offereddifferent or opposite solutions theold balesreappearedand the emptiness, the uselessness of the shared pseudo-programme which could only be a refusal to act were clearly shown.

And besides, the very idea of creating a patchwork programme,by looking for small points held in common, supposes that all thepoints of view put forward are correct, and that a programme canjust spring out of peoples minds, in the abstract.

Now,arevolutionaryprogramme, the anarchistprogramme,can-notbe onethat is created byafew people andthenimposed onthemasses. Its the opposite that must happen: the programme of therevolutionary vanguard, of the active minority, can only be the ex-pression concise and powerful, clear and rendered conscious andplainof the desires of the exploited masses summonedto make

the Revolution. In other words: class before party.e programme should be determined by the study, the testing

and the tradition of what is constantly sought by the masses. So inworking out the programmea certain empiricism should prevail, onethat avoids dogmatism and does not substitute a plan drawn up by asmall group of revolutionaries for what is shown by the actions andthoughts of the masses. In its turn, when the programme has beenworked out and brought to the knowledge of these masses it canonly raise their awareness. Finally, the programme as defined in this

37

along withthe opinion ofCamillo Berneri,who wrotefromthethickof the Spanish Revolution, refuting the Bolshevik idea of the State:

Anarchists acknowledge theuseofdirect power by the proletariatbut they see the instrument of this power as constituted by the sumtotal of modes of communist Organisation corporative bodiesand communal institutions, both regional and national freely setup outside ofand opposedto anypoliticalmonopolybyparty,and

endeavouring to reduce organisational centralisation to a minimum.And so against the idea of State, where power is exercised by

a specialised group isolated from the masses, we put the idea ofdirect workers power, where accountable and controlled elected del-egates (who can be recalled at any time and are remunerated at thesame rate as other workers) replace hierarchical, specialised andprivileged bureaucracy; where militias, controlled by adminstrativebodies such as soviets, unions and communes, with no special privi-leges for military technicians, realising the idea of the armed people,replace an army cut off from the body of Society and subordinated tothe arbitrary power of a State or government; where peoples juriesresponsible for seing disputes that arise in regard to the fulfillmentof agreements and obligations replace the judicial.

Defence of the Revolution

As far as defence of the Revolution of concerned we must makeclear that our theoretical conception of the Revolution is of an inter-nationalphenomenon destroying allbasisforcounter-aack by thebourgeoisie. It is whentheinternationalOrganisation ofcapitalismhas exhausted all its possibilities of survival, when it has reached its

final crisis point, that we find the optimum conditions for a success-ful international revolution. In this case the problem of its defenceonly arises as the problem of the complete disappearance of the bour-geoisie. Totally cut off from its economic and political power this nolonger exists as a class. Once routed, its various elements are keptundercontrolby the armed organs of the proletariat then absorbedbya societywhich willbe movingtowardsthe highestdegree ofho-mogeneity. And thislast job mustbetaken care ofdirectly,withoutthe help of any special bureaucratic body.


13/24

36

nothingto do with mechanical relations betweenleaders andledsuch as the term dictatorship implies.

To speak of dictatorship of the proletariat isto express a me-chanical reversal of the situation between the bourgeoisie and theproletariat. Now, if the bourgeois class tends through power to main-tain its class character, to identify itself with the State and to becomeseparated from society as a whole, it is not at all the same as the

subordinate class,whichtendstoleave off its class characterandtomerge with the classless society. If class rule and the State representthe organised and codified power of a group which oppresses subor-dinate groups they do not account in any way for the violent forceexercised directly by the proletariat.

e terms domination, dictatorship and state are as lile ap-propriate asthe expressiontaking power for therevolutionaryactof the seizure of the factories by the workers.

We reject then as inaccurate and causes of confusion the expres-sions dictatorship of the proletariat, taking political power, work-ers state, socialist state and proletarian state.

It remains for us to examine how we see the resolution of theproblems of struggles posed by the Revolution and by its defence.

Direct Workers Power

rough rejecting the idea of a State, which implies the existenceand rule of a exploiter class tending to continue as such, and re-jecting the idea of dictatorship, which implies mechanical relationsbetween leaders and led, we concede the need for coordination inrevolutionary direct action. (e means of production and exchange

must be seized along with the centres of administration, the revo-lution must be protected from counter-revolutionary groups, fromthe undecided, and indeed from backward exploited social groups(certain peasant categories for example).

It certainly is then about exercising power but it is the rule of themajority,of the proletariat in motion,of the armed people organisingeffectively foraack and defence,establishing universal vigilance.e experience of the Russian Revolution, of the machnovchina, of1936 Spain is there as witness. And we cannot do beer than go

13

way can be modified as analysis of the situation and the tendenciesof the masses progresses,and can bereformulatedin clearerandmore accurate terms.

ought of in this way the programme is no longer a group ofsecondary points which bring together (or rather do not divide)people who may think themselves nearly the same, but is instead abody of analyses and propositions which is only adopted by those

who believe in it and who undertake to spread the work and make itinto a reality.

But, you may say, this platform will have to be worked out, drawnup bysomeindividualorgroup.Ofcourse,butsinceits nota ques-tion of any old programmebut of the programmeof social anarchism,the only propositions that will be accepted arethose thataccord withthe interests, desires, thinking and revolutionary ability of the ex-ploited class. en you can properly speak of a synthesis becauseit is no longer a question of discarding important things that causedivision it is now a maer of blending into a new shared textpropositions which can unite on the essential point. Its the roleofstudymeetings,assemblies and conferences of revolutionariestoidentify a programme, then gather together again and found theirOrganisation on this programme.

e drama is that several organisations claim to truly representthe working class reformist socialist and authoritarian communistorganisations as well as the anarchistOrganisation.Only experiencecan sele the maer, can definitely decide which one is right.

ereis no possiblerevolution unlessthe mass ofpeople who willcreateit gather togetheronthe basis ofa certainideologicalunity,unless they act with the same mind. is means for us that through

their own experiences the masses will end up by finding the pathof libertarian communism. is also means that anarchist doctrineis never complete as far as its detailed views and application areconcerned and that it continuously creates and completes itself inthe light of historical events.

From partial trials such as the Paris Commune, the popular rev-olution in Russia in 1917, the Makhnovists, the achievements inSpain, strikes, the fact that the working class is experiencing the


14/24

14

hardrealities of totalorpartialstate socialism(fromthe USSRto na-tionalisationstothetreacheries of the politicalparties of the West) from all thisitseems possibleto statethat the anarchistprogramme,with all the modifications it is open to, represents the direction inwhich the ideological unity of the masses will be revealed.

For the moment, let us content ourselves with summarising thisprogramme so society without classes and without State.

3. Relations Between the Masses and the

Revolutionary Vanguard

We have seen, with regard to the problem of the programme, whatour general idea is of the relation between the oppressed class andthe revolutionary Organisation defined by a programme (that is, theparty in the true sense of the word). But we cant just say classbefore party and leave it at that. We must expand on this, explainhow the active minority, the revolutionary vanguard, is necessary

without it becoming a military-type leadership, a dictatorship overthe masses. In otherwords,we mustshowthat the anarchist idea ofthe active minority is in no way elitist, oligarchical or hierarchical.

e Need for a Vanguard

ere is an idea which says that the spontaneous initiative of themasses is enough for every revolutionary possibility.

Its true that history shows us some events that we can regard asspontaneous mass advances, and these events are precious because

they show the abilities and resources of the masses. But that doesntlead at all to a general concept of spontaneity this would be fatal-istic. Such a myth leads to populist demagogy and justification ofunprincipled rebellism; it can be reactionary and end in a wait-and-see policy and compromise.

Opposedtothis wefind a purely voluntarist idea which givestherevolutionary initiative only to the vanguard Organisation. Such anidealeadsto a pessimistic evaluation of therole of the masses, to anaristocratic contempt for their political ability to concealed direction

35

statistsystem. It isthereforethe negation of truerevolution,sinceitmaintains elements of the exploitative system whose tendency is togrow strong and expand.

e Dictatorship of the Proletariat

e formula dictatorshipof theproletariat hasbeen used to mean

many different things. If for no other reason it should be condemnedas a cause ofconfusion. With Marx itcanjustas easilymeanthecentralised dictatorship of the partywhich claimstorepresent theproletariat as it can the federalist conception of the Commune.

Can it mean the exercise of political power by the victoriousworking class? No, because the exercise of political power in therecognised sense of the term can only take place through the agencyof an exclusive group practising a monopoly of power, separatingitself fromthe class and oppressingit. Andthisis howthe aemptto use a State apparatus can reduce the dictatorship of the proletariatto the dictatorship of the party over the masses.

But if by dictatorship of the proletariat is understood collectiveand direct exercise of political power, this would mean the disap-pearance of political power since its distinctive characteristics aresupremacy exclusivity and monopoly. It is no longer a question ofexercising or seizing political power, it is about doing away with itall together!

If by dictatorship is meant the domination of the majority by aminority, thenit is nota question ofgiving power tothe proletariatbut to a party, a distinct political group. If by dictatorship is meantthe domination of a minority by the majority (domination by the

victorious proletariat of the remnants of a bourgeoisie that has beendefeated as a class) then the seing up of dictatorship means nothingbut the need for the majority to efficiently arrange for its defence itsown social Organisation.

But in thatcase theexpression is inaccurate, imprecise and a causeof misunderstandings. If dictatorship of the proletariat is intendedto meanthe supremacyof the working class overotherexploitedgroups in society (poor small owners, artisans, peasants, etc.) thenthe term does not at all correspond to a reality which in fact has


15/24

34

the nextwithoutanypreparation. Norhasit anythingto do withthe gradualist, purely evolutionary conception of the reformists orof the believers in revolution as process.

Our conception of revolution, equally removed from insurrec-tionalism and from gradualism, can be described by the idea of therevolutionary act prepared over a long period from within the bour-geoisie and at its end by the seizure and administration of the means

of production and exchange by the organisations of the people. Andit is this result of the revolutionary act which draws a clear line ofdemarcation between the old society and the new.

So the Revolution destroys the economic and political power ofthe bourgeoisie. is means that the Revolution does not limit itselfto physically suppressing the old rulers or to immobilising the ma-chinery of government but that it succeeds in destroying the legalinstitutions of the State: its laws and custom, hierarchical meth-ods and privileges, tradition and the cult of the State as a collectivepsychological reality.

e Period of Transition

is much being granted what meaning can we give to the com-monly used expression period of transition which is so oen seenas linked to the idea of revolution? If it is the passage between classsociety and classless society then it is being confused with the act ofRevolution. If it is the passage from the lower stage of communismto the higher then the expression is inaccurate because the wholepost-revolutionary era constitutes a slow continuous progression,a transformation without social upheavals, and communist society

will continue to evolve.All that can be said is what we have already made clear in con-

nection with libertarian communism: the act of Revolution bringsan immediate transformation in the sense that the foundations ofsociety are radically changed, but a progressive transformation inthe sense that communism is a constant development.

Indeed for the socialist parties and statist communists the transi-tory period represents a society which breaks with the old order ofthings but keeps some elements and survivals from the capitalist an

15

of revolutionary activity and so to defeat. is idea in fact containsthe germ of bureaucratic and Statist counter-revolution.

Closetothe spontaneist idea we can see atheoryaccordingtowhich mass organisations, unions for example, arenot onlysufficientfor themselves but suffice for everything. is idea, which calls itselftotally antipolitical, is in fact an economistic concept which is oenexpressed aspure syndicalism.Butwe would pointout that if the

theory wants to hold good then its supporters must refrain fromformulating any programme, any final statement. Otherwise theywill be constituting an ideological Organisation, in however smalla way, or forming a leadership sanctioning a given orientation. Sothis theory is only coherent if it limits itself to a socially neutralunderstanding of social problems, to empiricism.

Equally removed from spontaneism, empiricism and voluntarismwe stressthe need fora specific revolutionary anarchist Organisation,understood as the conscious and active vanguard of the people.

e Nature of the Role of the RevolutionaryVanguard

e revolutionary vanguard certainly exercises a guiding andleading role in relations to the movement of the masses. Argumentsabout this seem pointless to us as what other use could a revolu-tionary Organisation have? Its very existence aests to its leading,guiding character. e real questions is to know how this role is tobe understood, what meaning we give to the word leading.

e revolutionary Organisation tends to be created from the factthat the most conscious workers feel its necessity when confrontedby the unequal progress and inadequate cohesion of the masses.What must be made clear is that the revolutionary Organisationshould not constitute a power over the masses. its role as guideshould be thought of as being to formulate and express an ideolog-ical orientation, both organisational and tactical an orientationspecified, elaborated and adapted on the basis of the experiences anddesires of the masses. In this way the organisations directives arenot orders from outside but rather the mirrored expression of the


16/24

16

generalaspirations of the people.Sincethe directingfunction of therevolutionary Organisation cannot possibly be coercive it can onlyberevealed by itstryingto get i tsideas across successfully,by itsgiving the mass of the people a thorough knowledgeof its theoreticalprinciples and the main lines of its tactics. It is a struggle throughideas and through example. And if its not forgoen that the pro-gramme of the revolutionary Organisation, the path and the means

that it shows, reflect the experiences and desires of the masses thatthe organised vanguard is basically the mirror of the exploited class then its clear that leading is not dictating but coordinated orienta-tion, that on the contrary it opposes any bureaucratic manipulationof the masses, military style discipline or unthinking obedience.

e vanguard must set itself the task of developing the directpolitical responsibility of the masses, it must aim to increase themasses ability to organise themselves. So this concept of leadershipis both natural and raises awareness. In the same way the beerprepared, more mature militants inside the Organisation have therole of guide and educator to other members, so that all may becomewell informed and alert in both the theoretical and the practical field,so that all may become animators in their turn.

e organised minority is the vanguard of a larger army and takesits reason for being from that army the masses. If the activeminority, the vanguard, breaks away from the mass then it can nolonger carry out its proper function and it becomes a clique or atribe.

Inthefinalanalysistherevolutionaryminoritycan onlybetheservantof the oppressed. Ithas enormousresponsibilities butnoprivileges.

Another feature of the revolutionary organisations character isits permanence: there are times when it embodies and expresses amajority, which in turn tends to recogniseitself in theactive minority,but there are also periods of retreat when the revolutionary minorityis no more than a ship in a storm. en it must hold out so that it canquickly regain its audience the masses as soon as circumstancesbecome favourable again. Even when isolated and cut off from itspopular bases it actsaccordingto the constants of the peoples desires,holding onto its programme despite all difficulties. It may even be

33

And sothe Revolutionbased onthe powerof the masses of theproletariat as it frees the exploited class frees all humanity.

6. e Revolution: e Problem of

Power, the Problem of State

e Libertarian Communist Programme

e Revolution: e Problem of Power, the

Problem of State

Now that we have looked in broad outline at the forms in whichthe power of the ruling class is expressed, and set out the essentialcharacteristics of libertarian communism, it remains for us to sayin detail how we see the passage of Revolution. Here we touch ona crucial aspect of anarchism and one which differentiates it most

clearly from all other currents of socialism.

What is the Revolution?

Should the Revolution, that is the transition from the class societyto the classless libertarian communist society, be thought of as aslow process of transformation or as an insurrection?

efoundations of the communistsocietyarelaid withinthe so-ciety based on exploitation; new technical and economic conditions,new relations between classes, new ideas, all come into conflict with

the old institutions and bring about a crisis which demands a quickand decisive resolution. is brings a transformation which has longbeen prepared for within the old society. e Revolution is the mo-ment when the new society is born as it smashes the framework ofthe old: State capitalism and bourgeois ideologies. it is a real andconcrete passage between two worlds. So the Revolution can onlyhappen in objective conditions: the final crisis of the class regime.

is conception has nothingin common withthe oldromanticidea of theinsurrection,ofchange broughtabout from one day to


17/24

32

Inthese conditionsthe essentialactof revolution, the abolitionofexploitation, is broughtabout through workers controlandthiscontrol represents the system for replacing all authorities. It is thewhole body of producers which manages, which organises, whichrealises self-administration, true democracy, freedom in economicequality, the abolition of privileges and of minorities who directand exploit, which arranges for economic necessities and for the

needs of the Revolutions defence. Administration of things replacesgovernment of human beings.

If the abolition of the distinction in the economic field betweenthose who give orders and those who carry them out is accompaniedby the maintenance of this distinction in the political field, in theform of the dictatorship of a party or a minority, then it will eithernot last five minutes or will create a conflict between producers andpolitical bureaucrats. So workers control must realise the abolitionof all power held by a minority, of all manifestations of State. It canno longer be a question of one class dominating and leading, butrather of management and administration, in the political as muchas the economic arena, by the mass economic organisations, thecommunes, the people in arms. It is the peoples direct power, it isnot a State. If this is what some call the dictatorship of the proletariatthe term is of doubtful use (well come back to this) but it certainlyhas nothing in common with the dictatorship of the Party or anybureaucracy. It is simply true revolutionary democracy.

Libertarian Communism and Humanism

So anarchist communism, or libertarian communism, in realizing

the society,of humanitys full development, a society of fully humanwomen and men, opens up an era of permanent progression, ofgradual transformation, of transitions.

It does then create a humanism of purpose, whose ideology origi-nates within class society, in the course of the class struggles devel-opment, a humanism which has nothing in common with fraudulentpronouncements on the abstract human being whom the liberalbourgeois try to point out to us in their class society.

17

ledto certainisolated actsintendedto awakenthe masses(acts ofviolence against specific targets, insurrections). e difficulty thenis to avoid cuing yourself off from reality and becoming a sect oran authoritarian, military-type leadership to avoid wasting awaywhile living on dreams or trying to act without being understood,driven on or followed by the mass of the people.

To prevent such degeneration the minority must maintain con-

tactwith events and withthe milieu of the exploited it must lookout for the smallest reactions, the smallest revolts or achievements,study contemporary society in minute detail for its contradictions,weaknesses and possibilities for change. In his way, since the mi-nority takes part in all forms of resistance and action which canrange with events from demands to sabotage, from secret resistanceo open revolt) it keeps the chance of guiding and developing eventhe smallest disturbances.

By striving to maintain, or acquire, a wide general vision of socialevents and their development, by adapting its tactics to the condi-tions of the day, by being on its guard in this way the minoritystays true to its mission and voids the risk of trailing aer events, ofbecoming a mere spectacle outside of and stranger to the proletariat,of being bypassed by it. It (the minority) avoids confusing abstractreckonings and schemes for the true desires of the proletariat. Itsticks to its programme but adapts it and corrects its errors in thelight of events.

Whatever the circumstances the minority must never forget thatitsfinalaimisto disappear in becomingidenticalwiththe masseswhenthey reachtheirhighest levelofconsciousnessin achievingthe revolution.

In What Forms Can e Revolutionary Vanguard

Play Its Role

In practise there are two ways in which the revolutionary Or-ganisation can influence the masses: there is work in establishedmass organisations and there is the work of direct propaganda. issecond sort of activity takes place through papers and magazines,


18/24

18

campaigns of demands and agitation, cultural debates, solidarity ac-tions,demonstrations,conferences and public meetings. is directwork,which can sometimes be donethrough activities organisedby others, is essential for gaining strength and for reaching certainsections ofpublic opinion which are otherwiseinaccessible. Its ofthe utmost importance in both workplace and community. But thissort of work doesnt pose the problem of knowing how direction

can avoid becoming dictatorship.It is different for activity inside established mass organisations.

But first, what are these organisations?ey are generally of an economic character and based on the

social solidarity of their members but can have multiple functions defence(resistance,mutualaid),education(trainingforself-govern-ment) offence (demands on the tactical level, expropriation on thestrategic) and administration. ese organisations unions, work-ers fightcommiees and so oneven whentaking on onlyone ofthese possible functions offer a direct opportunity for work with themasses.

And as well as the economic structures there exist many popu-lar groupings through which the specific Organisation can makeconnections with the masses.

ese are, for example, cultural leisure and welfare associationsin which the specificOrganisation may find energy, advice and expe-rience. Here it may spread its influence by puing across its orienta-tion and by fighting against the aempts of state and politicians togain hegemony and control: fighting for the defence of these organ-isations sotheycan keeptheirown characterand become centresofselfgovernmentandrevolutionarymobilisation,seeds of the new

society (for elements of tomorrows society already exist in todays).Inside all these social and economic mass organisations influence

mustbe exercised and strengthened not through a system ofexter-nal decisions but through the active and coordinated presence ofrevolutionary anarchist militants within them and in the postsof responsibility to which theyre called according to their abilitiesand their aitude. It should be stressed though that militants shouldnot let themselves get stuck in absorbing but purely administrativeduties which leave them neither time nor opportunity to exercise

31

Libertarian Communism

A society in which collective ownership and the principles ofequality have been realised cannot be a society where economicexploitation persists or where there is a new form of class rule. It isprecisely the negation of those things.

Andthisistrue evenfor thelowerphase ofcommunism which,

evenif itshows a degree ofeconomic constraint, in no way justifiesthe persistence ofexploitation. Otherwise,sinceit nearlyalwaysstarts off from a situation of scarcity the revolution would be au-tomatically uerly negated. e libertarian communist revolutiondoes not realise from the start a perfect society, or even a highlydeveloped one, but it does destroy the bases of exploitation anddomination. It is in this sense that Voline spoke of immediate butprogressive revolution.

But there is another problem: the problem of the State, the prob-lem of what type of political, economic and social Organisation wellhave. Certainly the Marxist Leninist schools envisage the disappear-

ance of the Statein the higherstage of communism but theyconsiderthe State a necessity in its lower stage.

is so called workers or proletarian State is thought of asorganised coercion, made necessary by the inadequacy of economicdevelopment, lack of progress of human abilities and at least for aninitial period the fight against the remnants of the former rulingclasses defeated by the Revolution, or more exactly the degree ofrevolutionary territory within and without.

What is our idea of the kind of economic administration the com-munist society could have?

Workers administration of course, administration by the wholebodyofproducers.Now we have seenthatasthe exploiting societywas increasingly realizing the unification of power, the conditions ofexploitationwere decreasingly private property, themarket, competi-tion,etc . . . andinthis wayeconomic exploitation politicalcoercionandideologicalmystification were becomingintimately linked, theessential basis of power and the line of class division between ex-ploiters and exploited being the administration of production.


19/24

30

their needs. First it affirms the total subordination of the economicto the needs of human development in the abundance of goods, thereduction ofsocial labourand ofeach persons part init totheirown strengths, to their actual abilities. So the formula expresses thepossibility for peoples total development.

Secondly, this formula implies the disappearance of classes andthe collective ownership and use of the means of production, as

only such use by the community can allow distribution according toneeds.

But the complete communism of the formula to each accordingto their needs presupposes not only collective ownership (adminis-tered by workers councils or syndicates or communes) but equallyan extended growth in production, abundance in fact. Now, its forsure that when the Revolution comes conditions wont allow thishigher stage of communism: the situation of scarcity signifies thepersistence of the economic over the human and so a certain limit.en the application of communism is no longer that of the princi-ple to each according to their needs, but only equality of income

or equality of conditions, which amounts to equal rations or evendistributing through the medium of monetary tokens (of limited va-lidity and having the sole function of distributing those productswhich are neither so rare as to be strictly rationed nor so plentiful asto be help yourself) this system would allow the consumers todecide for themselves how to spend their income. It has even beenenvisaged that people might follow the formula to each accordingtotheirwork, taking accountof the backwardnessinthinking ofcertain categories aachedtoideas ofhierarchy consideringitnecessary to carry on with differential wage rates or to give advan-

tages like cuts in work time so as to maintain or increase productionin certain inferior or not very aractive activities, or to obtain themaximum productive effort or again to bring about work force move-ments.But theimportance of these differentials would be minimaland even in its lower stage (which some call socialism) the commu-nist society tends towards as great an equalisation as possible andan equivalence of conditions.

19

a real influence. Political opponents oen try to make prisoners ofmilitant revolutionaries in this way.

is work of infiltration as certain people call it should tend totransform the specificOrganisation from a minority to a majorityone at least from the point of view of influence.

It also ought to avoid any monopolisation, which would end uphaving all tasks even those of the specific Organisation taken

over by the mass organisation, or contrariwise would assign leader-ship of the mass associations only to members of the specific Organi-sation, brushing aside all other opinions. Here it must be made clearthat the specific Organisation shou@d promote and defend not justa democratic and federalist structure and way of working in massorganisations but also an open structure that is, one that makesentry easy for all element& that are not yet organised, so that themass organisations can win over new social forces, become morerepresentative and more able to give to the specific Organisation theclosest possible contact with the people.

Internal Principles Of e Revolutionary

Organisation Or Party

What wehavesaid about the programme,and about the roleof thevanguard anditstypes ofactivity,clearlyshowsthat thisvanguardmust be organised. How?

Ideological Unity

It is obvious that in order to act you need a body of coherent ideas.Contradictions and hesitations prevent ideas geing through. Onthe other hand, the synthesis, or rather the conglomeration, of ill-matched ideas whichonly agreeon what isnt ofany real importance,can onlycause confusion and cantstopitselfbeing destroyed bythe differences which are crucial.

As well as the reasons we found in our analysis of the problem ofthe programme, as well as deep ideological reasons concerning the


20/24

20

nature of thatprogramme, there are practical reasons which demandthat a genuine Organisation be based on ideological unity.

e expression of this shared and uniqueideologycan betheproduct of a synthesis but only in the sense of the search for asingle expression of basically similar ideas with a common essentialmeaning.

Ideological unity is established by the programme which we

looked at earlier (and will define later on): a libertarian commu-nist programme which expresses the general desires of the exploitedmasses.

We should again make it clear the the specific Organisation is nota union or contractual understanding between individuals bringingtheir own artificial ideological convictions. It arises and developsas an organic, natural way because it corresponds to a real need.Its development rests on a certain number of ideas which arentjust created all of a piece but which neglect the deep desires of theexploited. So the Organisation has a class basis although it doesaccept people originally from the privileged classes and in some way

rejected by them.

Tactical Unity, A Collective Way Of Acting

Using the programme as its basis the Organisation works out ageneral tactical direction. is allows it to exploit all the advantagesof structure: continuity and persistence in work, the abilities andstrengths of some making up for the weaknesses of others, concen-tration of efforts, economy of strength, the ability to respond toneeds and circumstances with the utmost effectiveness at any time.

Tactical unity prevents everyone flying off in all directions, freesthe movementof the disastrous effects ofseveralsets of tactics andfighting each other.

It is here we get the problem of working out tactics. As far asideology is concerned the basic programme, the principles if youlike thereis no problem: they arerecognised by everyone inthe Organisation. If thereis a difference ofopinion on essentialmaers there is a s plit and the newcomer to the Organisation accepts

29

a minimum of safeguards (allowances, Social Security, etc). It is nolonger an instrument but a power in itself.

At this stage,whichis being broughtabout in everycountry,eventhe U.S.A., was aempted by Nazism and almost perfectly aainedin the USSR, one may wonder if it is still correct to speak of capi-talism: perhaps this level of development of the imperialist stageof capitalism should not rather be seen as a new form of exploitive

society which is already something other than capitalism? e differ-ence then would be no longer quantitative but qualitative: it wouldno longer be a question of a degree of capitalisms evolution but ofsomething else, something really quite new and different. But thisis chiefly a maer of appreciation, of terminology, which may seempremature and without real importance at present.

It is enough for us to express as follows the form of exploitationand slavery towards which bourgeois society is tending: the Stateas a class apparatus and as Organisation of the class, simultaneouslyinstrumental and functional, superstructure and structure, is tendingto unify all the powers, every form of domination, of the bourgeoisie

over the proletariat.

5. e Qalities of Libertarian

Communism

Libertarian Communist Programme

e Qalities of Libertarian Communism

We have tried to summarise as clearly as possible the character-istics of the bourgeois society which the Revolution has the goal ofdoing away with as it creates a newsociety: the anarchist communistsociety. Before examining how we see the Revolution we must makeclear the essential qualities of this Libertarian Communist Society.

Communism: Fromthelower tothe higherstate orcompletecommunism

You could notdefine communistsocietyanybeer than by repeat-ing the old From each according to their means, to each according to


21/24

28

conscripted labour, concentration camps, forced movement of popu-lations, ideologies which justify the totalitarian order of things (forexample,a counterfeit version ofMarxist-Leninist ideology intheUSSR, race in Hitlers National Socialism, Ancient Rome in Mus-solinis Fascism, etc.).

e State

Ifcapitalism,despiteitstransformations,or its adaptations,helpsits permanent features(plusvalue,crises, competition,etc.) . . .the State can nolongerberegarded simplyasthe public Organisa-tion of repression in the hands of the ruling class, the agent of thebourgeoisie, capitalisms copper.

An examination of theforms of the State previoustothe periodof the rise of capitalism, and of the present day forms of the State,leads us to see the State as being important other than just as aninstrument. e Mediaeval, the State of the absolute monarchies ofEurope, the State of the Pharaohs etc . . . were realities in their ownright, they constituted the ruling State Class.

And the State of the imperialist stage of capitalism, the State oftoday, is tending away from being superstructure to itself becomingstructure.

For the ideologies of the bourgeoisie the State is the regulatororgan is modern society. is is true, but it is that because of a formof society which is the enslavement of a majority to a minority. Itis therefore the organised violence of the bourgeoisie against theworkers, it is the tool of the ruling class. But alongside this instru-mental aspect it is tending to acquire a functional character, itself

becoming the organised ruling class. It is tending to overcome theconflicts betweenthe controlling groups on politics and economics.It is tending to fuse the forces which hold political and economicpower, the different sectors of the bourgeoisie, into a single bloc,whether to increase its capacity for internal repression or to addtoits expansive powerabroad. It is movingtowardsthe unityofpolitics and economics,extendingits hegemonyoverallactivities,integrating the trade unions etc . . . transferring the waged workeras properly defined into a modern serf, completely enslaved but with

21

these basic principles,which can onlybe modified byunanimousagreement or at the cost of a separation.

It is quite anothermaer forquestions of tactics.Unanimitymaybe sought but only up to the point where for it to come about wouldmean everyone agreeing by deciding nothing, leave an Organisationlike an empty shell, drained of substance (and of use since the organ-isations exact purpose is to co-ordinate forces towards a common

goal). So, when all the arguments for the different proposals havebeen made, when discussion can not usefully continue, when similaropinions that agree in principle have merged and there still remainsan irreducible opposition between the tactics proposed then the Or-ganisation must find a way out. And there are only four possibilities:

(a) Decide nothing, so refuse to act, and then the Organisationloses all reason for existing.

(b) Accept the tactical differences and leave everyone to their ownpositions. e Organisation can allow this in certain cases on pointsthat are not of crucial importance.

(c) Consult the Organisation through a vote which will allow a

majority to break off, the minority accepted that it will give up itsideas as far as public activity is concerned but keeping the right todevelop its argument inside the Organisation judging that if itsopinions accord with reality more closely than the majority viewthen they will eventually prevail by proof of events.

Sometimes the lack of objectivity of this procedure has been in-voked, number not necessarily indicating truth, but it is the onlyone possible. It is in no way coercive as it only applies because themembers of the Organisation accept itas arule,and becausetheminorityaccept itas a necessity,which allowsthetacticalproposals

accepted to be put to the test.(d) When no agreement between majority and minority provespossible on a crucial issue which demandsthe Organisationtake aposition then there is, naturally and inevitably, a split.

In all cases the goal is tactical unity and if they did not try toachieve this then conferences would just be ineffective and profitlessconfrontations. ats why the first possible outcome (a) to decidenothing is to be rejected in every case and the second (b) toallow several different tactics can only be an exceptional choice.


22/24

22

Ofcourseit is onlymeetings wherethe whole Organisationisrepresented which can decide the tactical line to be laid down (con-ferences, congresses, etc.).

Collective Action And Discipline

Oncethese general tactics(ororientation)have been decidedthe

problem of applying them comes up. It is obvious that if the Organi-sation has laid down a line ofcollectiveaction it isso that the militantactivities of every member and every group within the Organisationwill conform to this line. In cases where a majority and a minorityhave drawn apart but the two sides have agreed to carry on workingtogether, no-one can find themselves bullied because all have agreedto this way of acting beforehand and had a hand in the drawing upof the line. is freely accepted discipline has nothing in commonwith military discipline and passive obedience to orders. ere is nocoercive machinery toimpose a pointof viewthat isntaccepted bythe whole Organisation: thereis simply respect forcommitmentsfreely made, as much for the minority as for the majority.

Ofcourse the militants and the different levels of the Organisationcan take initiatives but only in- so far as they do not contradict agree-ments and arrangements made by the proper bodies: that is, if theseinitiatives areinfactapplications ofcollective decisions. Butwhenparticular activities involve the whole Organisation each membermust consult the Organisationthrough liaison with its representativeorgans.

So, collective action and not action decided personally by separatemilitants.

Each member takes part in the activity of the whole Organisationin the same way as the Organisation is responsible for the revolu-tionary and political activity of each of its members, since they donotact inthe politicaldomain withoutconsultingthe Organisation.

Federation Or Internal Democracy

As opposedto centralism,whichisthe blind submission of themasses to a centre, federalism both allows those centralisations

27

Agreements(trusts,cartels,etc.) replace competition, joint-stockcompaniesreplacetheindividualboss,protectionismintervenes, theexportofcapitalcomesto be addedtothatofcommodities, financialcredit plays a major role, the merger of banking capital with indus-trial capital creates financier capital which tames the state and callson its intervention.

It is the time of petrol and electricity in the technical sphere; of

agreements, protectionism, the over-accumulation of capital and thetendency to fall of the rate of profit, of crises in the economic; ofwars, imperialism and the growth of the State in the political. Waris essential if crises are to overcome destruction frees markets. Inthe social sphere: poverty for the working class but social legislationlimits certain aspects of exploitation.

(4) State Capitalism: everything that characterised the previ-ous stage is accentuated. Wars are no longer enough to overcomecrises. A permanent war economy is needed which will invest hugeamounts of capital in the war industries while adding nothing to amarket already over-congested stuffed with goods; an appreciable

profit is procured by State orders.is period is characterised by the States seizure of the most

important sections of the economy, of the labour market.e State becomes capitalism client, purveyor and overseer of

works and labour power and so assures itself of every increasingcontrol of planning, culture and so on.

Bureaucracy develops, discipline and regulation are imposed onlabour.

Exploitation and the wage earning class remain, as do the otheressential features of capitalism, but with the appearance of socialis-

ing forms (regulations, Social Security, retirement pensions) whichmark the enslavement of more and more of the proletariat.State capitalism has various forms: German National Socialism,

Stalinist National Socialism, ever increasing state control in thedemocracies but appearing in a comparatively restricted form (dueto a still vast reserve of plus value from their colonies). Politicallyas economically this period tends to take on a totalitarian form.

So Statism reveals itself in forms simultaneously political, eco-nomic and cultural: State finance, war economy, huge public works,


23/24

26

(c) e supreme love of capitalism, the motive for the productionofgoods, is notpeoples needs but theincreasing ofprofit, that isthe surplus produced byworkers, the extrato what is absolutelynecessary for them to stay alive.

is surplus is also called plus-value.(d) Increase in the productivity of labour is not followed by the

valorisation of capital which is limited (under-consumption). is

contradiction, which is expressed by the tendency to fall of the rateof profit, creates periodic crises which lead the owners of capitalto all sorts of carry-ons: cut-backs in production, destruction ofproduce, unemployment, wars and so on.

Capitalism Has Evolved:(1) Pre-capitalist era: from the end of the Middle Ages the mer-

chant and banking bourgeoisie develops within the feudal economy.(2)Classicalor LiberalistorPrivate Capitalism: individualism of

the owners of capital, competition and expansion (aer the earlyaccumulation of capital, by dispossession, pillage, ruin of the peasantpopulation etc. the capitalism which has established itselfin Western

Europe has a world to conquer, enormous sources of wealth andmarkets which appear to be vast).

e bourgeois revolutions, by geing rid of feudal restraints, helpthe new system to develop.

It is industrialisation and technical progress which have beenthe basis for the existence of the capitalist mode of production andfor the transition from the mercantile bourgeoisie of the 15 th, 16 th

and17th Centuriestotheindustrialistcapitalistbourgeoisie. eycontinue to develop.

roughout this period crises are infrequent and not too serious.

e state plays a background role as competition gets rid of the weak it is the free play of the system. It is the time of gas and coal inthe technical sphere; of property, the individual boss, competitionand free trade in the economic; parliamentarianism in the political;total exploitation and the most dreadful poverty of the wage-earnersin the social.

(3) Monopoly Capitalism or Imperialism: productivity increasesbut markets constrict or dont increase at their previous rate. Fall inthe rate of profit of over accumulated capital.

23

which are necessaryand permitsthe autonomous decision-makingofeach memberandtheircontrolover the whole. Itonly involvesthe participants in what is shared by them.

When federalism brings together groups based on material inter-ests it relies on an agreement and the basis for unity can sometimesbe weak. is is the case in certain sectors of union activity. But intherevolutionaryanarchistOrganisation,whereits a question ofa

programme whichrepresentsthe generaldesires of the masses, thebasis for coming together (the principles, the programme) is moreimportant than any differences and unity is very strong: rather thana pact or a contract here we should speak of a functional, organic,natural unity.

So federalism must not be understood as the right to show offyour personal whims without considering the obligations to theOrganisation that youve taken on.

It means theunderstanding reached between members and groupswith a view to common work towards a shared goal but a freeunderstanding, a considered union.

Such an understanding implies on the one hand that those whoshare it fulfill the duties theyve accepted completely and go alongwith collective decisions; it implies on the other that thecoordinatingand executive bodies be appointed and controlled by the whole Or-ganisation at its assemblies and congresses and that their obligationsand prerogatives be precisely established.

So it is on the following bases that an effective anarchist Organi-sation can exist:

Ideological Unity Tactical Unity Collective Action and Discipline Federalism


24/24

24

4. e Libertarian Communist

Programme

Aspects Of Bourgeois Rule Capitalism And e

State

Before we show the goals and solutions of libertarian communismwe must examine what kind of enemy were faced with.

From whatwe can know ofhuman historywe seethateversincehuman societies have been dividedinto classes(and especiallysincethe division of social labour), there have been conflicts between thesocial classes and, from the earliest demandsand revolts, as if a chainof struggles fought for a beer life and a more just society.

Anarchist analysis considers that modern day society, like allthose which came before it, is not a single unit it is divided intotwo very different camps, different as much in their situation as intheir social function: the proletariat (in the broad sense of the word)and the bourgeoisie.

Added to this is the fact of the class struggle, whose charactermay vary sometimes complex and imperceptible, sometimes open,rapid and easy to see.

is struggleisveryoen masked byclashes ofsecondary inter-ests, conflicts between groups of the same class, complex historicalevents which at first sight dont have any direct connection with theexistence of classes and their rivalry. Basically though this struggleis always directedtowardstransforming contemporarysociety intoa societywhich would answer the needs wants and sense of justice

of the oppressed and through this, in a classless society, liberatingthe whole of humanity.

e structure of any society always expresses in its laws, moralityand culture the respective positions of the social classes someexploited and enslaved, the others holding property and authority.In modern societyeconomics, politics, law,moralityand cultureall reston the existence of the privileges and monopolies ofoneclass and ontheviolence organised by thatclassto maintainitssupremacy..

25

Capitalism

e capitalist system is very oen considered as the only form ofexploitative society. But capitalism is a relatively recent economicand social form and human societies have certainly known otherkinds of slavery and exploitation since the clans, the barbarian em-pires, the ancient cities, feudalism, the cities of the Renaissance and

so on.Analysis of thebirth,development andevolution of capitalism wasthe work of the movement of socialist theoreticians at the start of the19th Century (Marx and Engels did not more than systematise them),but this analysis gives a poor account of the general phenomenonof oppression by one class or another, and of its origin.

ere is no point geing involved in debate as to whether author-itycame before propertyor the otherway round. e presentstateofSociologydoes notallow usto selethe maerabsolutely,butit seems clear that economic, political, religious and moral powershave been closely linked from the very beginning. In any case, the

role of political power cannot be limited to its merely being the toolof economic might powers. In that way analysis of the phenome-non of capitalism was not accompanied by adequate analysis of thephenomenon of the State, because people were concentrating ona very limited part of history and only the anarchist theoreticians,especially Bakunin and Kropotkin, strove to give its full importanceto a phenomenon which too oen was limited to the State of theperiod of capitalisms rise.

Today the evolution of capitalism, passing from classical capital-ism to monopoly capitalism, then to directed and to State capitalism,is giving rise to new social forms which the summary analyses ofthe State can no longer account for.

What is Capitalism?

(a) It is a society of rival classes where the exploiting class ownsand controls the means of production.

(b) In capitalistsocietyallgoods includingthe powerofwagedlabour are commodities.

georges fontenis manifesto of libertarian communism.lt

Documents